Dereliction of Duty: Obama Did Nothing to Save American Lives in Benghazi--and Lied About It

page: 8
52
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 03:51 PM
link   
edit on 9-2-2013 by works4dhs because: sorry, dupe




posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by xedocodex
 


To reiterate: They could have prepared an exfil plan out of the insecure war zone that the ambassador was in.They could have determined that Lybia was too dangerous for any ambassador to function at all in the first place.
And lastly they could have answered when he called for help.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by GArnold

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by GArnold
 


Ummm if you think everyone isn't still outraged about 9/11 you'd be naive. There's a whole forum dedicated to the outrage. This new 9/11 attack is just more outrage to blame all Washington DC.

Bush sucked.

Obama sucks.

But all of DC has always sucked and will forever be the cradle for American suckage & evil.


. The fact is clear Bush not only knew about 9-11 and did nothing to stop it he then proceeded to lie about it.


A total lie. No one with any credibility has ever accused Bush or anyone in his administratrion of 'allowing' 9/11, not the most virulent and hateful Demcrat or media member. NO ONE.
if you have evidence take it to MSNBC, they would like nothing better than to attack him.
if you don't have evidence don't make stupid accusations. this sort of thing ruins this board's reputation and makes us all look like nuts and flakes.
edit on 9-2-2013 by works4dhs because: typo



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by GArnold
 


So your entire argument is Bush is more evil then Obama so lets forgive him. Are you serious?

No one here is saying Bush is a good guy, lets see if we can get it through your skull:

Bush = evil globalist
Obama = evil globalist


and lets forget the racism statement at the end shall we, that excuse apologists use is getting stale....no one cares that Obama is black.
edit on 9-2-2013 by MidnightTide because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by cavtrooper7
reply to post by xedocodex
 


To reiterate: They could have prepared an exfil plan out of the insecure war zone that the ambassador was in.They could have determined that Lybia was too dangerous for any ambassador to function at all in the first place.
And lastly they could have answered when he called for help.


And you don't think they had those plans?

You do know that Stevens died from smoke inhalation, right?

You do know he was in the process of being evacuated from the consulate and he didn't follow his guard, right?

You do know that ambassadors jobs is to go into dangerous places to find diplomatic solutions...right?

You do know that no one "called for help" and was denied....right?


You, like most on this thread, are in deep in the Right Wing false talking points. Just because you hear your favorite talking head say it over and over and over and over and over and over and over.....doesn't mean that it is true.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


So, where were you guys when Americans were being attacked and dying at consulates and embassies around the world while "W" was in office? I don't recall ANYONE from the right and only a very few on the left, (well except for the 9/11 incident), calling for investigations. And as for 9/11, the administration was told in several of the daily threat assessments that an attack was imminent and might involve flying planes into buildings. But Bush, Cheney, Rice, et al, all skated.

What that means is it is time for you to put on your big girl panties and STFU. You have no grounds, factual, moral or otherwise to complain.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by MidnightTide
 


And so is Clinton, the male one, he ignored the warnings about Bin Laden first.




posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Ghost375
 


Still don't get that it was a high value target that was killed.

First time in 30 years an Ambassador was killed.

I don't want to see any death, but this elevates things.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 05:12 PM
link   
bush administration had plenty of warnings about 9-11 and did not do anything. 3000 citizens died that day. that is dereliction of duty too. your own criteria back at you.

as to benghazi,, yes, a tragedy and bad mistakes were made. and i believe that some of the blame can be layed at the feet of the republican led congress. they control the purse strings. they cut funds for security for over seas embassies in their last few budgets.
edit on 9-2-2013 by blackthorne because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by works4dhs

Originally posted by GArnold


. The fact is clear Bush not only knew about 9-11 and did nothing to stop it he then proceeded to lie about it.


A total lie. No one with any credibility has ever accused Bush or anyone in his administratrion of 'allowing' 9/11, not the most virulent and hateful Demcrat or media member. NO ONE.
if you have evidence take it to MSNBC, they would like nothing better than to attack him.
if you don't have evidence don't make stupid accusations. this sort of thing ruins this board's reputation and makes us all look like nuts and flakes.
edit on 9-2-2013 by works4dhs because: typo

There is clear evidence Bush knew about 9/11 a month before it happened, and then he lied about it.

Bush's secret memo No conspiracy talk needed. He knew about it, and then lied about knowing about it. complete fact.
It was even on mainstream stations and no one did jack about it. There was half the outrage over that on this website, than the 4 people that died under Obama's watch.
It's so hypocritical. It's laughable what you guys are doing. Your political bias is showing!
edit on 9-2-2013 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)


Talk of it on ATS
A familiar face on there lol. I won't name any names but:
Defending a man who knew about an event that killed 3000 people, and even blaming a democrat....but outraged that 4 people died under Obama.
ZERO stars for this thread.

You guys are ridiculous.

edit on 9-2-2013 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)
edit on 9-2-2013 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost375
reply to post by burntheships
 


What if there were bombs at the location?
He sends in 15 more troops, and all of a sudden you have a whole mess of causalities.

I'm trying to think of it as a commander in a war situation would handle it. Not like a hater sitting behind a computer screen.
If you run any military maneuver and only 4 people die, it's a success and the right choice was made.

I'm extremely anti-war in general. But I understand how decisions like that are made. It's war, people die.

You guys are letting your hate blind you.


I do, in fact, have experience commanding troops in combat.

What Obama did was in no way "commanding." nor was it a cold examination of the facts in holding back reinforcements/rescue in order to lessen casualties.

He wasn't even F'ing present. He never checked in to get the info to make an informed decision as CiC. So your argument makes no sense.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Ghost375
 


Here we go, plenty of blame to go around: Who was president in 1998?


1998-06 – "TERRORISM: Terrorism: Bin Ladin Threatening to Attack US Aircraft," Senior Executive Intelligence Brief [Undated- Cited in 9/11 Commission Report as June 1998 p. 342]. [9/11 Commission Report - Chapter 11, Endnote 5]



1998-12-03 – [Title Excised] Planning by Usama Bin Ladin to Hijack U.S. Airplane, Successful Circumvention of Security Measures in U.S. Airport. [9/11 Commission Report - Chapter 4, Endnote 112]



1998-12-24 – "[Excised] Timeframe for Completion of Hijacking Operation [Excised]," Central Intelligence Agency Intelligence Report. [9/11 Commission Report - Chapter 4, Endnote 113]


This one didnt happen:


2001-05-24 – [Title Excised] "A Group Presently in the United States Planning to Conduct a Terrorist Operation Involving the Use of High Explosives," Central Intelligence Agency Intelligence Report. [9/11 Commission Report - Chapter 8, Endnote 9]



2001-07-13 – "Terrorism: Bin Ladin Plans Delayed but Not Abandoned [Excised]," Senior Executive Intelligence Brief. [9/11 Commission Report - Chapter 8, Endnote 28]



2001-07-25 – "Terrorism: One Bin Ladin Operation Delayed, Others Ongoing [Excised]," Senior Executive Intelligence Brief. [9/11 Commission Report - Chapter 8, Endnote 28]



2001-08-06 – "Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US," President's Daily Brief, Central Intelligence Agency. [9/11 Commission Report - Chapter 8, Endnote 38. Reprinted on Page 261 of the 9/11 Commission Report.] 2001-08-07 – "Terrorism: Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in the US," Senior Executive Intelligence Brief. [9/11 Commission Report - Chapter 8, Endnote 38. Chapter 11, Endnote 5. Page 342] 2001-08-21 – "Re: Khalid Al-Mihdhar," Memorandum, Central Intelligence Agency Email. Cited in 9/11 Commission Report as "Mary to John." [9/11 Commission Report - Chapter 8, Endnote 106 9/11 Commission Report] 2001-08-23 – "DCI Update Terrorist Threat Review," Central Intelligence Agency. [9/11 Commission Report - Chapter 8, Endnote 103] 2001-08-24 – "Terrorism: Sanitized Version of Threat Report," Central Intelligence Agency Intelligence Report. [9/11 Commission Report - Chapter 8, Endnote 39]


www.gwu.edu...

Have fun reading all the memos, way back to early 90's.


There are tons of memos, tons of ideas, how could you prepare for all of them? Big difference from protecting ambassadors on one specific day.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Ghost375
 


Show me a memo from the CIA, The Pentagon etc that says terrorists were going to hit on a specified date, in a specified place........


I'll wait.....



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by timetothink
 


Did the attack happen under Clinton or Bush?
Did Clinton lie about it or did Bush?

Trying to say Clinton is responsible is just asinine.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 05:58 PM
link   
you can bet your entire life savings that if someone threatened obummer's daughters and said they were gonna PUNCH them, not even shoot them, there would of been drones circling and most likely agents on the ground ready to imprison you for life.

meanwhile terrorists express their desire to attack our consulate on the anniversary of 9/11 and no one takes it serious? no extra consulate guards? CIA/Retired SEAL assets getting left to die not to mention our ambassador..

thats treason at the least and it just goes to show how unqualified this guy really is to be our president..he isn't even fit to be a defense lawyer in a shoplifting trial

SHAME



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by Ghost375
 


Show me a memo from the CIA, The Pentagon etc that says terrorists were going to hit on a specified date, in a specified place........


I'll wait.....

Bush didn't have a date but they had a location and the means of carrying it out. The august 6th memo clearly mentions the WTC, Washington. and it mentions hijacking a plane.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Ghost375
 


Trying to say Bush knew it was going to happen and did nothing to stop it is asinine.

Why didnt Clinton do anything to try and stop him, let Bush know anything?



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by Ghost375
 


Trying to say Bush knew it was going to happen and did nothing to stop it is asinine.

Why didnt Clinton do anything to try and stop him, let Bush know anything?


Now you're just putting words in my mouth.

I never said he did nothing to stop it, but I have yet to see any proof of him doing anything.



He knew about it, and then lied about knowing about it. complete fact.

Do you still not get that trying to debate this fact is asinine?

And Clinton DID try to kill Osama. Link

Republicans mocked him for going after Bin Laden.

You guys don't give a # about facts.
edit on 9-2-2013 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)
edit on 9-2-2013 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 06:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Ghost375
 


This guy does "give a #" about facts but you are just trying to sugar coat the Democrat # and calling it candy. In fact why the derailment of the thread about Bush, it is about Obama. We know why, because it is acceptable if a Democrat does it, not a Republican - and vise versa - all depends on who makes the thread.

I could go on and explain how Obama is Bush 2.0, but we all have heard it before. Both are turds and no matter how to much sugar you put on it, a turd is a turd.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by TauCetixeta
reply to post by burntheships
 


Could Ambassador Christopher Stevens have been saved?
The truth is yes.
They didn't even try.



I think so, he asked for help long before the attacks. Of course, Hillary was too
busy to read the cables, and Obama did not attend his security meetings.

They cant be bothered with National Security, you know.


As for any survivors, thats really a good question. I have not looked into that angle,
however I suppose we could go looking for those that survived the bin Laden
"take down" and find our answer. Anyone left alive to talk, well not for long.





new topics
 
52
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join